What happened to Committment?
Wed, 25 Feb 2004, 10:37 amHarbour12 posts in thread
What happened to Committment?
Wed, 25 Feb 2004, 10:37 amThere used to be a saying "The show must go on".
People were committed to a particular club (or two) and that no matter how bad the play was, or how unbearable the situation, there was a commitment from everyone involved in a production to carry on. There was a dedication to the audience to go ahead. That seems to have been lost over the last few years.
Now, actors are only interested in performing for themselves - stuff the audience, and if my ego gets hurt, then there is no hestitation in pulling out - stuff the consequences. And I can understand and sympathise with some of the reasons. It is very distressing to the self when there are 'problems' with a production, or a person, that can make the rehearsals very unbearable, and I think there isn't a time in every show when I would like to quit. BUT, we are not in this for yourselves. We do this to bring entertainment to others and by pulling out of a production before it goes up is a disappointment to the audience and to everyone else involved. Not to mention the cost of reimbursement of memberships, royalties, publicity, tickets, etc.
But this appears to be the way of the future, and it's sad. Virtually every club is struggling to find committed members to run the Club, or do backstage or FOH. It is often left to a few overworked and dedicated individuals, while all the rest flitter from club to club to perform, then move on when the going gets tough.
Well, it's not good enough. That is why productions and theatre's fold - no commitment. If you are going to perform in a show, be committed, otherwise DON'T waste yours and our time coming to auditions.
There, I got that off my chest. Now, is there anyone out there that cares?
People were committed to a particular club (or two) and that no matter how bad the play was, or how unbearable the situation, there was a commitment from everyone involved in a production to carry on. There was a dedication to the audience to go ahead. That seems to have been lost over the last few years.
Now, actors are only interested in performing for themselves - stuff the audience, and if my ego gets hurt, then there is no hestitation in pulling out - stuff the consequences. And I can understand and sympathise with some of the reasons. It is very distressing to the self when there are 'problems' with a production, or a person, that can make the rehearsals very unbearable, and I think there isn't a time in every show when I would like to quit. BUT, we are not in this for yourselves. We do this to bring entertainment to others and by pulling out of a production before it goes up is a disappointment to the audience and to everyone else involved. Not to mention the cost of reimbursement of memberships, royalties, publicity, tickets, etc.
But this appears to be the way of the future, and it's sad. Virtually every club is struggling to find committed members to run the Club, or do backstage or FOH. It is often left to a few overworked and dedicated individuals, while all the rest flitter from club to club to perform, then move on when the going gets tough.
Well, it's not good enough. That is why productions and theatre's fold - no commitment. If you are going to perform in a show, be committed, otherwise DON'T waste yours and our time coming to auditions.
There, I got that off my chest. Now, is there anyone out there that cares?
Re: What happened to Committment?
Wed, 25 Feb 2004, 02:18 pmRob Tagliaferri wrote:
>
> Craig K Edwards wrote:
> > "Now I think putting the 'commitment' requirement at the stage
> > of AUDITIONING may be a bit harsh - "
>
> Why? Shouldn't the director expect some commitment from you
> when you come to audition? Otherwise, why should the director
> sit and listen when you'll just take off to audition for the
> next show?
>
Rob, there are sometimes many auditions on for shows at the same time. Most Perth clubs have a November/Dec season and they all audition at once. Should an actor be forced to chose and only audition for one and hope against hope they get it? And if they don't, miss out on doing anything at all for the next few months? I auditioned for a show not that long ago in which more than twenty five women auditioned for one role. Should all those women have forgone any other opportunity out of a sense of loyalty to a club they weren't members of, and a director they'd never met, because he deined to listen to them audition?
One other point on the topic of actors dropping out of shows because of ego. I have never dropped out of a show (that I can remember) so I can't speak for myself here, but there are many reasons that actors have to forgo committments, and in my experience only a very small number of these are ego related. I have never seen an actor drop out of a show I have been in because they don't think the production is good enough for them. I have seen actors drop out of shows because they decide a two minuet walk on is not worth the kind of time committment the director is asking of them, and to a certain extent I think thats fair enough. We all have families, jobs, friends, other things to be doing.
Dropping out when you know the show will fold without you is serious, but in my experience people almost always have a bloody good reason for doing so.
But there is an interesting question here. I am not a professional actor, so if I am in a show that is universally acknowledged to be complete crap, it doesn't really matter. But what if your livelihood depends on your reputation, and staying in a show will damage that reputation? I wonder if it's OK to drop out then?
>
> Craig K Edwards wrote:
> > "Now I think putting the 'commitment' requirement at the stage
> > of AUDITIONING may be a bit harsh - "
>
> Why? Shouldn't the director expect some commitment from you
> when you come to audition? Otherwise, why should the director
> sit and listen when you'll just take off to audition for the
> next show?
>
Rob, there are sometimes many auditions on for shows at the same time. Most Perth clubs have a November/Dec season and they all audition at once. Should an actor be forced to chose and only audition for one and hope against hope they get it? And if they don't, miss out on doing anything at all for the next few months? I auditioned for a show not that long ago in which more than twenty five women auditioned for one role. Should all those women have forgone any other opportunity out of a sense of loyalty to a club they weren't members of, and a director they'd never met, because he deined to listen to them audition?
One other point on the topic of actors dropping out of shows because of ego. I have never dropped out of a show (that I can remember) so I can't speak for myself here, but there are many reasons that actors have to forgo committments, and in my experience only a very small number of these are ego related. I have never seen an actor drop out of a show I have been in because they don't think the production is good enough for them. I have seen actors drop out of shows because they decide a two minuet walk on is not worth the kind of time committment the director is asking of them, and to a certain extent I think thats fair enough. We all have families, jobs, friends, other things to be doing.
Dropping out when you know the show will fold without you is serious, but in my experience people almost always have a bloody good reason for doing so.
But there is an interesting question here. I am not a professional actor, so if I am in a show that is universally acknowledged to be complete crap, it doesn't really matter. But what if your livelihood depends on your reputation, and staying in a show will damage that reputation? I wonder if it's OK to drop out then?
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···